The Impossibility of Utopian Society, The Resurrection of Hope
Reflections on João Batista Libânio’s “Utopia, Hope, Resurrection”
This week on the Mad Liberation front, we discussed João Batista Libânio’s juxtaposition of the alluring concept of utopia (and humanity’s failed attempts at creating utopian societies on earth) and hope. As a South American liberation theorist, Libânio discussed the difference between human-born utopian ideals and the more tenable hope inherent in the Resurrection of Jesus Chirst. He credits Thomas More with the creation of the word “utopia,” which was the title of More’s 1516 political novel. Libânio’s explaination of “utopia” was helpful in discussion, so I’m including it for those who have not read Libânio’s work:
“Utopia comes from ouk-topos, ‘no place.’ It refers to a ‘place which does not exist anywhere.’ It is imaginary, ideal, unreal, not here, nowhere in this world. But the term can also have the etymology eu-topos, ‘good place.’ This expresses the dimension of happiness, joy, space, fulfillment. It reveals our human capacity to anticipate through imagination things which can become reality. In this sense utopia means ‘the place where we are really at home; the place where we can feel comfortable.’ It exists somewhere, and so it can become a model to copy. The reality we desire (eu-topos) is the counterweight to the unreal dimension (ouk-topos). Thus the term has an intentional ambiguity between the real and unreal.”(Kindle Locations 7066–7072)*
In his work, Libânio discusses a variety of historical attempts at creating utopian societies, stating that these societies are born at times of crisis. Among them he lists Renaissance, liberal, social, and commune utopias. All of which, he states, “arise when the present becomes unbearable. They point toward a possible change in human history, the creation of a new, different world,”(Kindle Locations 7092–7093).
In contrast, Libânio states that “Hope” is a different, more tenable, rooted and, well… hopeful prospect than a utopian society. He states:
“Hope, however, grows in much more difficult and hostile ground. Its true origin is an impossible situation in human terms, one we cannot overcome by relying on our present potential and human strength, but only on God’s promises and power. It is an experience of God within our own human courage, our own unbreakable hope.” (Kindle Locations 7093–7095)
As a group we discussed the difference between Utopia and Hope. We mourned the societies that have tried to create their own versions of Utopia by force (Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, The Communist Party of China, U.S. capitalist greed and classism, etc.). One person’s version of utopia is another person’s version of hell. Usually the flawed ideology in these attempts for utopia is the opinion that a particular group of people are the problem, and as such must be eradicated. We came to the same conclusion that Libânio arrives at: utopia cannot be created by human effort or through a single group’s social lens. Someone is always excluded or their differences are defined as wrong, and often even dangerous. Their differences threaten the ruling class’ ideal.
Our current political climate can speak volumes to this type of conflict of interest. The Republican party views Immigration as a threat to their ideal, believing that the immigrants are stealing their resources (jobs, housing, etc.). And on the other hand, the Democratic party believes that all people deserve to have their basic needs met and that it is the responsibility of the whole to take care of the few — an ideal which also threatens the resources of those who have wealth, and those who perceive that they have very limited resources. The fear of scarcity drives greed and, in turn, poverty.
The apparent conflict between human agency and systematic oppression, (as limited opportunity) came up as we discussed homelessness, sexism and racism, specifically in the U.S. Is the “American Dream” even a possibility for those living on the margins? How about those living with neuro atypical processing or PTSD (especially undiagnosed)? We discussed our personal connections with people struggling to find jobs, homes, community and/or means to support themselves. “Get a job!” is a common response to pan-handlers, and there are some government programs to help them do so, but what about the hopelessness and ignorance they face? We, like the whole of the United States, grapple to find the answers, and like a small microcosm of the system at large, found ourselves disagreeing on how change should be accomplished. We did agree on one thing: our current methods are by and far not working.
Libânio speaks on the reality that social change seems to birth out of the laboring classes, but is then comendeered by those in the ruling class. He says:
“Utopias which begin from below, with the exploited, end up in the hands of those who are on top and become ideology. So utopia is degraded into ideology. Historically we know the case of the utopia of freedom — absolute, liberal, spontaneous — which ended up producing mechanisms of oppression and highjacking this freedom to serve the ruling classes. Thus the utopia of freedom destroyed the possibility of freedom for the masses.”(Kindle Locations 7152–7155)
We collectively sighed, lamenting the greed-riden state of humanity. Then the conversation shifted, in attempt to focus on hope, specifically hope in the realm of social change. If utopia isn’t an option for us as a fallen human race, what hope is there? We were both encouraged and saddened that humanity seems doomed to struggle with racism, classism, and sexism. And while Libânio speaks mostly of a hope in God as the hope of humanity, I was also struck by the hope of God within us. I looked around the room at a mass of people who are thirsty for righteousness and justice for the marginalized and underrepresented. These people are generous and compassionate, working hard to love well and to join God in the quest to bring hope to the world. And though we are flawed, we still persevere in the difficult work of being human.
I will leave you with one final word from Libânio:
“Humans are utopian beings. This fundamental condition derives from the insuperable tension between our openness to the world as a whole and our particular situation in limited time and space. On the one hand, we face boundless horizons, regions and lands without limit. We are self-transcending spirit. We are imagination, desire, creativity. Our questioning never ceases. Our will is not satisfied with any particular good. We want good in itself, unconditional good. …We are dynamic, in movement….We are beings-tending-to-be-more. We live with a permanent calling to the future.” (Kindle Locations 7107–7112).
*All quotations taken from João Batista Libânio’s “Utopia, Hope, Resurrection” found in
Sobrino, Jon; Ellacuria, Ignacio (2015–03–30). Systematic Theology: Perspectives from Liberation Theology (Readings from Mysterium Liberationis) (Faith Meets Faith). Orbis Books. Kindle Edition.
